Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
Author:  "Michael Carson" 
Date:    11/29/2000 1:10 PM
     
     
In support of full disclosure I will quote part of the report from The Ad Hoc 
Working Group on Proposed Regulation FD and the Legal and Compliance Division of
the Securities Industry Association 

..." [an] alternative model of millions of individual investors and potential 
investors poring over prospectuses and periodic reports is highly theoretical 
and out of sync with the real world"

    This statement implies that individuals should not have access to any and
all information available about a company in which they'd like to invest.  It's 
their money, why shouldn't they know where it's going?  

    I'm a physician.  Patients often come to us with information they heard
about in the paper, on the internet, or on TV.  Clearly those sources do not 
always give a complete picture to the patient/consumer.  So, they ask their 
doctor.  I have no problem with patients being able to research their health or 
a specific condition if it helps them understand, cope, or feel confident the 
correct thing is being done.  Sometimes they ask questions and I must perform 
some research to answer it.  Is it ethical for physicians to keep information 
from patients?  I think most would say no.  Is it ethical to keep information 
from investors and only give it to finnancial agents in order to try and insure 
their job security?  Is it reasonable to continue a system where the consumer 
cannot always be sure the finnancial agent is correct?  People consider their 
money and their health very important.  They are not the same, but I challenge 
you to find me a person who is happy with either declining health or a declining
bank account.  It will make the job more challenging, but I can't come up with a
reason that the standard for disclosure in the finnancial industry should be 
lower than other professional fields.

Thanks.
     
Michael P. Carson, MD
Office 732-745-8600 ext. 8180